I’d like to welcome our friend Chief Jason Henry of the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation. Thank you for coming down and paying a visit.

Let me quote the NDP member from Waterloo, who, on December 12, 2019, said about ALC, “These are patients who should not be in a hospital.” Unbelievable, after what we’ve been hearing, what they’ve been saying lately. “They should be in long-term care or in retirement or assisted living options.”

A second NDP member, for Oshawa, who, on March 26, 2018, said on ALC: “I’d love to have a conversation about alternate level of care, or ALC, which is taking up our hospital space for folks in transition, in limbo. Are they even on waiting lists? They’re just in limbo, so do they count? Are they on the waiting list? I’d love to put them somewhere.”

So, on one side, they’re saying that they shouldn’t be in the hospitals; next day, they should be in the hospitals. Make up your minds.

To the Premier: Less than two weeks ago, the government announced sweeping changes to Ontario’s health care system. And late last week, they revealed they would be rushing these changes through and bypassing any hearings at all.

Why is the government refusing to hear from the front-line workers and families who will be impacted by these changes?

The Ford government’s scheme could force patients into long-term-care homes up to 300 kilometres away from their families—300 kilometres—and hit them with massive fees if they refuse to move.

We just completed an election campaign. We didn’t hear a single word from this government about this scheme at that time. But now after announcing it less than 12 days ago, they’re shutting down any discussion.

Why are they afraid to hear from the families and front-line workers who will be devastated by these changes?

Speaker, it’s not clear who the government is listening to. Long-term-care homes have told the government there are not enough beds in long-term-care homes to relieve hospital pressures—the operators themselves. Front-line nurses have told the government that Bill 7 does nothing to address the hospital crisis in Ontario; it simply forces patients from one understaffed environment into another.

Is the government refusing to hold hearings because they know their plan won’t work and they don’t want to hear it?

Speaker, I honestly do not know where the NDP have been. As the Premier just highlighted, of course, they talked about this before. We have known that this has been a problem for decades in the province of Ontario: how to handle ALC patients in our hospitals. We have said the status quo is not an option. We have invested billions of dollars into our long-term-care system. Experts agree that the best place for somebody who has been discharged from hospital, who is on the long-term-care-home waiting list, to wait for their preferred home of choice is in a long-term-care home, not in a hospital bed.

The status quo will not work, and we will not stop. We will improve the system for the people who are in our hospitals, who are waiting to become residents of long-term-care homes. Despite their protecting of the status quo, we will move forward, because it’s better for the residents of long-term care, Mr. Speaker.

I look at the words of the former member for Timmins, Gilles Bisson, when he talked about long-term care. What does this mean when we don’t transfer people out of hospitals into long-term care? He said what this means is “that when you bring your child to the hospital because they broke their arm, you have to wait longer at the emergency because there is no place to deal with them.”

While they can support the status quo, we will not, because we know that if you’re a senior on the long-term-care waiting list being discharged from a hospital, your better place to be is in a long-term-care home, not in a hospital bed waiting for that transfer.

We’ve invested in 58,000 new and upgraded homes all across the province, in every region—north, south, east, west, rural, remote, urban. We are adding 27,000 additional health care workers, four hours of care, the Fixing Long-Term Care Act—a ground-breaking piece of legislation that they voted against.

But the reality is, there are 6,000 people in hospital beds who have been discharged and are looking for care somewhere else. Long-term care can be part of the solution for the first time in decades. There are close to 2,000 seniors in hospital, waiting to be in a long-term-care home, Mr. Speaker. Experts agree that that is not the place for a senior. They deserve to be in long-term-care homes. This bill facilitates that from happening and allows our acute care system to recover for the first time in decades. We can be a part and we will.

Long-term care can be part of a solution, and you know why we can be part of that solution, Mr. Speaker? Because we are making incredible investments into long-term care: 58,000 new and upgraded beds across the province, 27,000 additional health care workers, four hours of care—all things that the Liberals and NDP refused to do when they had the opportunity, something that this Premier said he would do even in advance of becoming the Premier. It was a major plank.

We started from day one transitioning health care in this province, and we will not stop. We will not support the status quo, because we can do better and we will do better for seniors and all Ontarians.

You could ask anyone in Ontario: Would they want their elderly loved-one sitting in a hospital, in a bed, as noise is going around 24/7, not being able to get out and take a walk, when you can give them a home—not a bed, but a home. And a home would be in a long-term-care home. They have entertainment at night. They are able to walk around. Family members are able to come in and watch the entertainment with them. That’s a home versus a hospital, where you’re stuck in a room with four other patients, the alarms are going off, bells are going off.

That would be cruel, to leave a loved one, any parent in this province, in a hospital. We need them in a home. And that’s what we’re providing: 58,000 new homes.

The government is refusing to hear from patients and front-line health workers about Bill 7, so the NDP held hearings of its own this morning. Here’s what front-line experts called the Ford government’s scheme this morning: “The process is antidemocratic. The bill is a shocking abandonment of patient rights.” They called this “Hunger Games health care. The bill is callously misleading Ontarians.”

Why is this Ford government moving ahead without hearings? Because they don’t want to hear what a disaster it will be.

People on the front lines are warning this government: This puts seniors’ lives at risk. Why are they refusing to listen? Why are they not thinking about the 5,000 seniors that have already died in long-term-care facilities, 40 over the last two weeks? Repeal Bill 124.

We are in a health care crisis. Emergency rooms are closing. Hundreds of health care jobs are vacant. The fundamental problem with this bill is that it’s blaming the patient—the most vulnerable, the seniors—for a problem that’s not their fault. Instead of solving the issue, it’s blaming the patient, the seniors. Patients, experts and front-line workers have offered this government solutions. Instead of listening, this government has ignored them all.

Repeal Bill 124. Give them paid sick days. Hire more nurses. Hire more PSWs. You can do so many things. Get internationally trained professionals recognized. These are real solutions to address this problem, not Bill 7.

This government has put a cruel plan forward that threatens seniors with huge fees if they refuse to move hundreds of kilometres from friends and families. My question is, why is this government being so cruel to the most vulnerable people of our province?

My Don Valley West constituents are also concerned about Bill 7 and the effect it will have on patient care, which is stated as a priority in the government’s budget. Yet elderly patients risk being transferred to facilities far from family and their community, which play an important role in supporting seniors in need.

Seniors in long-term-care facilities—in particular, private ones—have suffered a great deal during the pandemic, with higher death rates and long periods of isolation. Once again, this government is asking seniors, some of our most vulnerable, to take one for the team and help solve the crisis in our hospitals by moving to a home not of their choosing, instead of acknowledging that we are in a staffing crisis created by measures like Bill 124.

Mr. Speaker, could the Minister of Long-Term Care tell us why this government is treating our seniors like a burden and legislating unfair treatment with Bill 7 instead of solving the staffing problem and treating our health care workers respectfully by repealing Bill 124?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and to the minister for his view of history. I’ll add to that history that the momentous decrease in hospital beds—from which we are still recovering—occurred between 1990 and 1999, under two other previous governments.

This government’s Bill 7 will send seniors to long-term-care facilities that are not amongst the choices that are best for them. Furthermore, these seniors could be going into for-profit long-term-care facilities which are suffering from severe staffing challenges, as referred to in their recent quarterly reporting increases.

Will the Minister of Long-Term Care tell us how he can assure patients and their families that seniors sent to their non-preferred homes—in particular, for-profit ones—will receive the care they need when these facilities continue to deal with pervasive staffing challenges?

My question is to the Premier. This government’s failure to deal with the health care crisis is not just affecting hospitals; it’s hurting patients who rely on home care as well.

This month, Robin Floyd’s son, who is vision-impaired and has a heart condition, went for surgery at London Health Sciences Centre. After being discharged with a drainage tube, he was told that a home care nurse would come the next day to check the incision and drain the tube. After countless phone calls and endless frustration, Robin finally managed to get a home care appointment nine days after her son had his surgery.

Does this government believe that that is an appropriate standard of care?

Kim’s story is not new and not unique. The VON told me they can’t meet 50% of the referrals they get. Why is this government completely ignoring the long-standing problems in home and community care?

Thank you to the member for Barrie–Innisfil for the question. It’s almost like she borrowed words from my speech and was trying to use them against me. It’s rather interesting.

On the official opposition side, we have always advocated to listen to the front lines in health care.

Throughout this throne speech, we don’t see any listening to the front lines of health care—we hear “working with system partners,” and we saw a government that worked with long-term-care owner-operators throughout the pandemic. They created legislation to protect them from legal liability for all the deaths that happened on their watch. That’s frightening.

Instead, we need to listen to the workers. We need to listen to the nurses. We need to listen to the PSWs. We need to listen to the patients who are actually being impacted. That would include having a committee so that we could actually discuss Bill 7 and hear from the people who are going to be impacted, the people who are going to be coerced and forced out of the hospital into a place where they don’t want to go, hundreds of kilometres away, away from their family. That would be listening. That would be your actions matching your words.

Instead, we have all sorts of talk in this throne speech—but it’s coded language; it’s hiding what is actually going on, and that’s increasing privatization. Quite frankly, that is something I believe Ontarians are frightened of.

Why don’t you just be forthright and tell Ontarians what you’re hoping to do—and that is to make health care for-profit in Ontario?

By listening to people, by actually engaging with Ontarians, the official opposition has been able to advocate on some very important pieces of legislation. Those include the member for Windsor West’s More Than a Visitor Act, something that would give essential caregivers more of a role within health care decisions that are being made for folks in long-term care. That was incredibly important, because, throughout the pandemic, we saw that many of these essential caregivers, these loved ones, these people who provided care, who helped buttress a system that has been woefully undercut and underfunded for many, many years—they were the ones who were actually providing that care, and they were shut out from these homes. They were not allowed to see their loved ones, and that’s so difficult on a senior, on someone with disabilities—the only thing that they look forward to every day is seeing that loved one.

Also, we had other legislation—like Till Death Do Us Part Act, to make sure that loved ones are kept in the same home, from the member for Waterloo, and so many other things.

We see a government that doesn’t want to work across party lines and that doesn’t want to work with each other.

I want to thank the member opposite for his speech. I did pick up a couple of themes, especially with respect to involvement of the private sector.

Just a couple of months ago, when I was visiting long-term-care facilities, a staff member came to me and wished me success in the election. She let me know that she was voting PC for the first time in her life. That’s probably why I’m here. She was a proud long-term-care nurse who works in the private sector. She cares about her patients and is proud of the work she does to care for people. The narrative that the private sector is not competent and is not doing the appropriate work for their patients is distressing.

Can the member explain how opposing the hard work of our private sector long-term-care facilities that can help build up supportive services to more people and keep Ontario open—